November 13, 2012

I meant to write election thoughts out over the weekend, but the time was spent getting last minute stuff done outside in anticipation of this week's cold snap. It was a brisk 18° when I got up this morning. I think it's going to be a hard winter. Last year the jet stream kept the really cold air bottled up in Canada for most of the winter. An early dip like this makes me think that blocking force won't be in place this year. The only question in my mind is how much moisture will make it here. If that pattern changes too we're in for it this winter.

Now that it has been a week and the emotions, high and low, have settled down a bit, here are a few observations about the 2012 elections.

-Obama won a strong victory in the Electoral College, but other numbers tell a closer story. The right swing of less than 500,000 votes across only four states and we would be talking about President-elect Romney's cabinet picks right now. Out of about 120 million votes that is a smaller margin of victory than many Democrats want to admit. I understand the urge to claim a mandate, it comes naturally to the partisans on both sides in such situations. It doesn't actually exist though, and to try to act as if it does is only going to lead to political sorrow for Democrats.

-I find it interesting and pleasing in a way that voters in Missouri and Indiana , especially Republicans in those states, went for Romney and yet rejected the Republican nominees for US Senate. Lord knows I would much rather have those seats filled by Republicans, but at least it shows that Republicans are not the unthinking monolith that some on the left try to make them out as. Are there any comparable statewide results for Democrats this year?

-As of yesterday morning, Obama lost a staggering 7.5 million votes from his 2008 total. Retaining those really would have meant a mandate. Instead, it just means that disillusioned voters simply couldn't bring themselves to vote for Romney and stayed home. And a big reason for that is because Obama's strategy of division, demonization, and character assassination worked. It also left Obama with what I believe will be something of a Pyrrhic victory. Such tactics leave an awful lot of hardened hearts and only a brief window to try bring people back together. It will take deeds, not words, and I don't think Obama is up to the task. It's not what he campaigned on and besides, he's too much of an ideologue.

-If it didn't sink in after 2008, this year's election cycle should make it crystal clear to conservatives/libertarians that the big legacy media, NY Times, WaPo, CBS, NBC, ABC, NPR, are our political opponents every bit as much as the Democrats. Don't call them the enemy, because that has far more deadly connotations, but it's time to act like they are the opposition. No more of this BS about "journalists" moderating debates. No more acting as if they are objective. That doesn't mean disengaging from them or being impolite, it's simply recognizing that they are an opponent and letting them know it.

That also means nominating people who can survive in that environment because they aren't morons who say stupid stuff about, I don't know, rape. Mourdock's gaffe in Indiana was a clumsy attempt to articulate a religious belief that is consistent with the position that all life is sacred. Agree or disagree, it was not driven by ill intent. But the media will not give a break to Republicans like they will for Democrats. It's the way it is, so nominate candidates accordingly. As for Akin in Missouri, he's not only an idiot, he's an asshole for not stepping down.

-I have no pick right now for who I want to see run as the Republican nominee in 2016. What I do want though, is for that person to spend the next three years speaking and writing about what they believe and their vision for America. Reagan did that for many years before being elected in 1980. Whoever wants the Republican nomination in 2016 needs to get cracking along those lines now, because I think we are really, really going to need a Ronald Reagan by then.

-Much is being said about demographics and the future of the GOP right now, but much of that is through the hyper-racial prism of Democratic politics and it would be a mistake for Republicans to get sucked into that when there are two things they can do to attract youths of all races. They aren't easy things to do, but they are necessary or many young people will not listen to anything that the GOP has to offer. The first deals with evolution/creationism and the second is about abortion. Both are probably best addressed in separate posts.

-The world did not end last week and I have the mortgage payment receipt from today to prove it. And while I wish that Romney had won because I think he is far better equipped to deal with the current mess, perhaps it's best that Obama inherits the results of his own administration. No more whining about Bush, no more woe is me bullshit. It's now or never. He can cease continue being our first special needs president or he can get the job done. There's really no other choice.

November 06, 2012

Got back from voting a bit ago. My precinct at mid-afternoon once again had nearly all of the booths filled, but no waiting. Turnout appears to be a little down from 2008, though that could be just timing. I was vote #1422 at 3:00 PM today. In 2008 I was vote #1427 at 2:00 PM, so that's down about 200 votes, or about 12%. That feels right based on a general feeling that enthusiasm is down in this roughly 55-60% Democratic precinct. In 2008 every block in my neighborhood had more than one Obama sign. This year quite a few blocks have none at all. I certainly wouldn't bet on that meaning a Romney win, but I think tomorrow will find Obama's support has taken a big hit.

Two other big items on the ballot: Minnesota voter ID and marriage amendments.

I don't particularly like the Voter ID amendment, but I voted for it because Democrats left me no choice by not taking election integrity seriously. And I'm absolutely furious about the voter suppression slurs. I doubt that it's going to pass this year, but it will be on the ballot again if it doesn't. Bet on it.

I voted against the marriage amendment, for my brother and one sister. I'll say this though, I am adamant that if/when gay marriage arrives in this state it will be done by the will of the people. We're not that far from seeing that happen I think. If it arrives by judicial fiat, then there will be another amendment proposed, this time banning it. I'll probably vote in favor of that, because I'm not going to live in a judicial tyranny if I can help it.

I'm sure it's no surprise that I voted for Romney. I don't know if he can win, but if he doesn't my words from 2008 will still apply:

Congratulations to President-elect Obama and his supporters on their victory yesterday. My best wishes and hopes that you will do what is right for this country.

In what I got right and wrong in that post are some of the reasons for voting for Romney.

My gut tells me that we have been manipulated into a mistake, but hopefully I'm wrong about that.

Nope, I was right.

This should put to rest the false and poisonous notion that so many racial hucksters have used that America today is a racist nation where a black man can't win.

Wrong, the race-baiters in the Democratic Party are more active than ever and Obama has done nothing, nothing to counter their lies. I think race relations have actually gone backward because of it.

It also means that those who have spewed the most hateful and vile rhetoric the last eight years now have their wish. I suspect that they will soon rediscover that the job of President of the United States is a difficult one. One without a script or a crystal ball, and filled with tough and perilous decisions. Mistakes will be made just as in any presidency.

Man, has that come true. If it wasn't for the press covering his ass, Obama would be down ten points right now.

Now fully burdened with the nation's security, it will be interesting to see what happens with issues like "domestic spying" and "enemy combatants". Will Democrats actually go 9/10 on us? Or will we basically see the continuation of many of Bush's policies in these areas with perhaps a cosmetic change or two as a fig leaf?

Continuation it is, along with a whole bunch of hypocrisy from Democrats who shut their yaps as soon as Obama took office. Maybe we can get Big Bird to lead a spelling chant on, oh, Guantanamo. Give us a "G", Big Bird! All of the outrage when Bush was in office was just politics. Phony.

Beyond what I wrote that day, if you had told me back then that banks in four years would be bigger and even more likely to demand and get a bailout after screwing up I would not have believed you. But there it is.

October 31, 2012

As we enter the the final week of Election 2012, a StarTribune Minnesota Poll has shocked more than a few people here and around the country:

As the presidential race tightens across the country, a new Star Tribune Minnesota Poll has found that it is narrowing here as well, with President Obama holding a 3-point lead and Republican Mitt Romney making gains in the state.

The poll shows Obama with support from 47 percent of likely voters and Romney earning backing from 44 percent -- a lead within the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

I'm not going to bet that a majority or even a plurality of Minnesotans will turn away from Obama this election, but that poll says it is a possibility. That feels about right to me this year, at least in my left-leaning first-ring suburb of Minneapolis. Let's go to one measure of enthusiasm, the yard signs.

My admittedly informal guess is that there are roughly half the Obama yard signs in my neck of the woods this year compared to 2008. Yard signs for any candidate for Congress, Republican or Democrat, are almost non-existent(both incumbents are Democrats), unlike the ubiquitous Ellison signs just two years ago.

There's a marriage amendment on the ballot here and "Vote No" signs are abundant in Minneapolis proper. They aren't even close in my neighborhood. I think I've seen only one "Vote No" sign on the Voter ID amendment around here. On the flip side, I've seen no "Vote Yes" signs for either amendment. That doesn't surprise me though. I think people are afraid to openly support either amendment as that politically correct position may invite abuse and unwanted attention. For the record, at this point I will vote for Voter ID, against the marriage protection amendment.

In 2008, Minnesota went 54-44% in favor of Obama. There is no way to spin a 47-44% poll this cycle as a good thing for Obama. It appears he has lost significant support and anecdotal evidence supports that, though I think it is still most likely that he will win the state. It's looks like it's going to be very close here, and that in itself is a surprise.

Yeah, yeah, he totally didn't mean to come across as callously indifferent to the murder of four Americans. But you know what? After a few days of "binders of women" bullshit and entire campaign of crap like "Romney killed my wife," I don't give a shit.

October 16, 2012

I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV. I will not yell at the TV...

October 04, 2012

What has Big Bird ever done to Mitt Romney?! Did a young Mitt try to meet Big Bird and Big Bird snubbed him? Did Big Bird in essence give Mitt "the bird'? Or was Romney just channeling his inner Oscar the Grouch?

For those who may have missed it, during last night's presidential debate, Mitt Romney said that if elected president he would cut funding to PBS. He even mentioned Big Bird by name. (This is even more shocking because Mitt offered very few specifics on how he would cut the deficit other than slashing support for PBS.)

Romney is right. Big Bird, or actually Sesame Workshop, needs a taxpayer subsidy like Oprah needs to have us buy her a couch. A quick look at their 2009 form 990 that they filed with the IRS(the most recent I found) shows total revenue of $130,606,413. It lists $7,968,918 of that revenue as coming from government grants.

In addition, the form states that at the end of 2009 Sesame Workshop had net assets of $351,131,137. That's right, $351 million dollars.

I don't care that Sesame Workshop's president, Gary Knell, made almost $750,000 in 2009. I don't care that writer Joseph Mazzarino made over $650,000 or another dozen or so employees made well north of $200,000.

“Sesame Workshop receives very, very little funding from PBS. So, we are able to raise our funding through philanthropic, through our licensed product, which goes back into the educational programming, through corporate underwriting and sponsorship. So quite frankly, you can debate whether or not there should be funding of public broadcasting. But when they always try to tout out Big Bird, and say we’re going to kill Big Bird – that is actually misleading, because Sesame Street will be here.”

What's misleading is to say that Romney or anyone else who matters is out to "kill Big Bird." Make all the money you want, Sesame Workshop. Live long and prosper, Big Bird. Just do it without public money.

Or to put it in a way that even Westin can understand, "It's the subsidy, stupid."

September 07, 2012

I didn't see him deliver his acceptance speech last night and I haven't read too much detailed commentary about it, but from what I have seen so far I can't believe President Obama is not getting more grief about this:

"But know this, America: Our problems can be solved. Our challenges can be met. The path we offer may be harder, but it leads to a better place," he said.

It leads to a better place? A "better place" is where we go after a lingering and terminal illness.

"He's in a better place now."

A "better place" is where the family dog went after he nipped a small chunk out of my little brother's cheek when we were kids. Oh, our parents told us the whole farm story and everything and we believed it, but when we grew up we all figured out the real score.

I don't know about you, but I don't want to go to a "better place." Er, not yet anyways.

August 09, 2012

The President we need is someone who would jump on this with a speed and determination that would scare the living crap out of even the most jaded bureaucrats and politicians in Washington D.C.:

The U.S. Treasury inspector general report accuses the IRS of discouraging employees from reviewing applications for the ID numbers, which are generally from non-resident workers.

The inspector general specifically said there were 154 mailing addresses that were used 1,000 or more times on applications, including 15,795 numbers assigned to a Phoenix address.

The report, which evaluated the processing year 2011, also found inadequate controls can result in the numbers being assigned to people who have not proved their identity or foreign status, which can result in fraudulent tax returns.

The inspector general also found 10 individual addresses were used for filing 53,994 tax returns and receiving $86.4 million in fraudulent tax refunds. For example, 23,994 tax refunds totaling $46.3 million were issued to an address in Atlanta; and 2,507 tax refunds totaling $10.4 million were issued to an address in Oxnard, Calif.

In addition, the Treasury’s Inspector General for Tax Administration reports found 10 bank accounts received 23,560 tax refunds totaling more than $16 million -- including: 2,706 tax refunds issued to a single account totaling $7.3 million.

He or she would then:

Invite the senior leadership of both parties in Congress to the White House for a one hour meeting with the Secretaries of Treasury and Justice.

Demand an immediate system fix to flag unreasonable numbers of multiple refunds to the same address or account before they are processed.

Demand that the taxpayer ID system be cleaned up immediately.

Demand that federal agents and prosecutors descend on those fraudsters like a host of locusts. Not soon, YESTERDAY GODDAMMIT!

Demand that Congress move on any legislation that might be needed to clean this up. Not after six months of studies, NOW GODDAMMIT!

And if some screaming and ass-chewing or even the humiliation of a public firing is what it takes to get some action, do it.

The President of the United States is the chief executive of the federal government. I don't expect him to root out and find the unbelievable dysfunction detailed above, but when it is discovered I expect him to act, and act quickly and publicly. It's his administration and that's his job.

Now, I realize that politicians like to think big picture, but the biggest picture of all for a president is making sure that the basic functions of his administration are working reasonably well. Not perfectly, just reasonably well. This is not an example of reasonably well.

I wouldn't expect any president to make something like this his full time job, but I don't want to hear one word about grandiose plans or dreamy visions from any administration, Republican or Democrat, that is so fucking incompetent that it sends out 23,994 tax refunds totaling $46.3 million to one fucking address. Fix the basics first.